3 ms·

The real big deal about 'claws' in that they're agents oriented around the user. The kind of AI everyone hates is the stuff that is built into products. This i

The real big deal about 'claws' in that they're agents oriented around the user. The kind of AI everyone hates is the stuff that is built into products. This is AI representing the company. It's a foreign invader in your space. Claws are owned by you and are custom to you. You even name them. It's the difference between R2D2 and a robot clone trying to sell you shit. (I'm aware that the llms themselves aren't local but they operate locally and are branded/customized/controlled by the user)

luckylion 8mo ago
It always depends on who you consider the user. The one who initiated the agent, or the one who interacts with it? Is the latter a user or a victim?
1shooner 8mo ago
I agree, and it seems like the incumbents in this user-oriented space (OS vendors) would be letting the messy, insecure version play out before making an earnest attempt at rolling it into their products.
tokenless 8mo ago
Well we are early. Big tech will make it more convenient, free and then they can inject ads etc.
sleight42 8mo ago
Yet the Claw is powered by an LLM provider whose underlying model may not align with your priorities? Do I understand that correctly?
- throwaway13337 8mo ago
  That's right. And don't forget that the chips it runs on are manufactured by companies I might not agree with. Nor the mining companies that got the metal. Nor the energy company that powers it. The wonderful thing about markets that work is that you can swap things out without being under their boot. I worry about a LLM duopology. But as long as open weight models are nipping at their heels, it is the consumer that stands to benefit. The train we're on means a lot of tech companies will feel a creative destruction sort of pain. They might want to stop it but are forced by the market to participate. Remember that Google sat on their AI tech before being forced to productize it by OpenAI. In a working market, companies are forced to give consumers what they want.
  - tines 8mo ago
    > And don't forget that the chips it runs on are manufactured by companies I might not agree with. Nor the mining companies that got the metal. Nor the energy company that powers it. You see that this is a non sequitur right? No matter who makes the chips or mines the metal or supplies the power, the behavior of the thing won't be affected. That isn't the case when we're talking about who's training the LLM that's running your shit.
    - dirasieb 8mo ago
      What do you think a GPU is? A chip manufacturer absolutely has the ability to add their own bias in firmware and drivers.
      - ropintus 8mo ago
        Care to explain how chip makers can influence the inference outcome of LLMs?
    - throwaway13337 8mo ago
      It's a good thing that there are so many LLM choices out there, then. Maybe the fundamental disagreement is whether LLMs will be a commodity product or not. I think they will be since there hasn't been an indicator that secret sauce lasts more than a few months. The open weight models are, at most, a year behind. We're in a different environment. The last tech rules of e.g. network effect cannot be directly applied.
  - paulryanrogers 8mo ago
    > In a working market, companies are forced to give consumers what they want. I want personal nuclear weapons, so the market hasn't been working for me. Time to roll back those pesky laws, regulations, and ethical boundaries. Prosecute executives who won't give me what I want.
    - PantaloonFlames 8mo ago
      Cmon man. “Consumers” in aggregate. Not “every consumer”. But you knew that.
devonkelley 8mo ago
[dead]

luckylion 8mo ago

It always depends on who you consider the user. The one who initiated the agent, or the one who interacts with it? Is the latter a user or a victim?

1shooner 8mo ago

I agree, and it seems like the incumbents in this user-oriented space (OS vendors) would be letting the messy, insecure version play out before making an earnest attempt at rolling it into their products.

tokenless 8mo ago

Well we are early. Big tech will make it more convenient, free and then they can inject ads etc.

sleight42 8mo ago

Yet the Claw is powered by an LLM provider whose underlying model may not align with your priorities? Do I understand that correctly?

throwaway13337 8mo ago
That's right. And don't forget that the chips it runs on are manufactured by companies I might not agree with. Nor the mining companies that got the metal. Nor the energy company that powers it. The wonderful thing about markets that work is that you can swap things out without being under their boot. I worry about a LLM duopology. But as long as open weight models are nipping at their heels, it is the consumer that stands to benefit. The train we're on means a lot of tech companies will feel a creative destruction sort of pain. They might want to stop it but are forced by the market to participate. Remember that Google sat on their AI tech before being forced to productize it by OpenAI. In a working market, companies are forced to give consumers what they want.
- tines 8mo ago
  > And don't forget that the chips it runs on are manufactured by companies I might not agree with. Nor the mining companies that got the metal. Nor the energy company that powers it. You see that this is a non sequitur right? No matter who makes the chips or mines the metal or supplies the power, the behavior of the thing won't be affected. That isn't the case when we're talking about who's training the LLM that's running your shit.
  - dirasieb 8mo ago
    What do you think a GPU is? A chip manufacturer absolutely has the ability to add their own bias in firmware and drivers.
    - ropintus 8mo ago
      Care to explain how chip makers can influence the inference outcome of LLMs?
  - throwaway13337 8mo ago
    It's a good thing that there are so many LLM choices out there, then. Maybe the fundamental disagreement is whether LLMs will be a commodity product or not. I think they will be since there hasn't been an indicator that secret sauce lasts more than a few months. The open weight models are, at most, a year behind. We're in a different environment. The last tech rules of e.g. network effect cannot be directly applied.
- paulryanrogers 8mo ago
  > In a working market, companies are forced to give consumers what they want. I want personal nuclear weapons, so the market hasn't been working for me. Time to roll back those pesky laws, regulations, and ethical boundaries. Prosecute executives who won't give me what I want.
  - PantaloonFlames 8mo ago
    Cmon man. “Consumers” in aggregate. Not “every consumer”. But you knew that.

devonkelley 8mo ago

[dead]